[ac500]

But I thought the NFB12 is supposed to be severely inadequate for the HD800? It is a bit dark with rolled off treble (not hugely, ~ -2db I think at 10-20khz) so that's nice synergy-wise I suppose. Still the NFB12 is not exactly ultra high end, at least not like what people here were recommending for the HD800 to "sound decent".
 
The HD800 sounds stupendously good to me right now. It sounds WAY more than just "decent" out of my lowly NFB12.
 
But I have no frame of reference with me as to what it should sound like. I just know it blows away every other headphone I've owned without any shadow of a doubt, but for all I know with a better amp it could be even more impressive.
 
> Plug them back into your Macbook and you'll feel that way. 
 
The Macbook->HD800 doesn't sound "thin" or "dry", it sounds blurry and just low-fi overall.

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

 
The Macbook->HD800 doesn't sound "thin" or "dry", it sounds blurry and just low-fi overall.

Well that's a positive I guess.
 

 

[ac500]

> Well that's a positive I guess.
 
How so (I don't disagree, I just don't understand what you meant)?
 
I meant that out of my macbook, it didn't sound thin/dry per se, because it was so blurry that it wasn't really on a level of quality sufficient enough to even begin judging whether it's thin or not.
 
Obviously this was expected. The only reason I plugged it in was just out of pure curiosity.

 

[Anaxilus]

Positive in that it's not thin or dry from the macbook though it sounds like you couldn't get to that point?  Anyway, not worth exploring really.

 

[Gwarmi]

Quote:

But I thought the NFB12 is supposed to be severely inadequate for the HD800? It is a bit dark with rolled off treble (not hugely, ~ -2db I think at 10-20khz) so that's nice synergy-wise I suppose. Still the NFB12 is not exactly ultra high end, at least not like what people here were recommending for the HD800 to "sound decent".
 
The HD800 sounds stupendously good to me right now. It sounds WAY more than just "decent" out of my lowly NFB12.
 
But I have no frame of reference with me as to what it should sound like. I just know it blows away every other headphone I've owned without any shadow of a doubt, but for all I know with a better amp it could be even more impressive.
 
> Plug them back into your Macbook and you'll feel that way. 
 
The Macbook->HD800 doesn't sound "thin" or "dry", it sounds blurry and just low-fi overall.

 
 You don't give the little NFB12 enough credit ~ in the entry level it rules supreme, especially if you add the
 Digital Interface assuming you're running off USB.
 
 Plenty of other DAC/Amp combos out there for more money that simply don't stack up, especially once
 the USB to SPDIF Interface comes into it. 300mW at 300ohm is nothing to sneeze at, plenty of so called
 mid-fi solid state amps would struggle to cough that up.
 
 2012 will be a good year for Audio GD I suspect.
 

 

[John Willett]

Quote:

The Macbook->HD800 doesn't sound "thin" or "dry", it sounds blurry and just low-fi overall.

Not on mine - but then, I do have an optical connection to my Grace m902b and listen on that.

 

[ac500]

Yes if I had Macbook->m902b->HD800 I would imagine my observation would be similar to yours in that case
 
Fun fact: Some of you may remember that one or two head-fi'ers were claiming the $300 Shure SRH940 sounds similar in sound quality to the HD800 (I've owned the SRH940 since mid last year). Needless to say it doesn't even come close (sound signature is vaguely familiar but not really). I explained this on the SRH940 thread. Some people there were quite upset to hear that, it turns out (edit: actually it was just one person who was upset.) I think some people just prefer ignorance/bliss over reality.

 

[Saintly]

Quote:

Fun fact: Some of you may remember that one or two head-fi'ers were claiming the $300 Shure SRH940 sounds similar in sound quality to the HD800 (I've owned the SRH940 since mid last year). Needless to say it doesn't even come close (sound signature is vaguely familiar but not really). I explained this on the SRH940 thread. Some people there were quite upset to hear that, it turns out (edit: actually it was just one person who was upset.) I think some people just prefer ignorance/bliss over reality.

Just like the broski who insists that his Sr125i gives over 90% of the performance of the flagships.  It's best to let them live in their own world rather than burst their bubble.
 
Edit: I forgot to mention that he has not heard a flagship.

 

[maverickronin]

Quote:

Just like the broski who insists that his Sr125i gives over 90% of the performance of the flagships.  It's best to let them live in their own world rather than burst their bubble.

I pretty much agree with that.  The differences we pay for in this hobby are pretty small.  That said, the HD800s are great and I'd take (and pay for) the HD800s over my T50RPs if I didn't need the isolation.

 

[Saintly]

Quote:

I pretty much agree with that.  The differences we pay for in this hobby are pretty small.  That said, the HD800s are great and I'd take (and pay for) the HD800s over my T50RPs if I didn't need the isolation.

 
You already said this in the other thread.
 
My main beef with his claim is that he made it without having heard anything close to flagship level.
 

 

[Draygonn]

Fun fact: Some of you may remember that one or two head-fi'ers were claiming the $300 Shure SRH940 sounds similar in sound quality to the HD800

Most people haven't heard what the HD800s can really do.

  That said, the HD800s are great and I'd take (and pay for) the HD800s over my T50RPs if I didn't need the isolation.

I think they are great compliments. Thats why I ordered Thunderpants for when I want closed cans or listen to Led Zepplin. The group buy has started shipping, yay!

 

[ac500]

> Most people haven't heard what the HD800s can really do.
 
I know, but you don't have to hear what it can "really do" for it to still be vastly superior to the mid-fi headphones (I haven't heard what the HD800s can really do, considering my amp, and it's still leagues ahead of the SRH940 in every way).
 
Anyway I'm just glad I feel no urge to upgrade my amp for now. I may change my mind though after I bring my headphones to the local meet and get a chance to try better ones.

 

[johnjen]

So I found an old thread about EQ in the digital domain.  It wasn't helpful in that the solution crashed my Mac.  BUT I found a nifty tool that does the job
 
http://www.rogueamoeba.com/audiohijackpro/  it comes with (among others) a parametric EQ module.  It only costs $32 and can be used for demo purposes (10 minutes at a time) for free.
 
Oh and here is an article that helps explain more of the program  http://tidbits.com/article/7961
 
I'm still fussing with the knobs but it just might help with tailoring the FR curves.
 
JJ

 

[ac500]

I tried audio hijack on my mac and wasn't very happy with the results (tested with my HD650). Maybe because you have to manually adjust the output gain to make sure the equalized waveform doesn't get clipped. I just never came to like the sound I was hearing through it... but I probably didn't adjust the settings properly.
 
My PC's built in sound card's equalizer on the other hand sounds flawless. It also is smart enough to make sure it NEVER results in clipping. The huge drawback is that it only works on my PC and I fear if I upgrade to a different motherboard some day I may get different sound software.
 
Right now I'm not that interested in EQing my HD800s though because I actually really like their sound signature so far. 

 

[maverickronin]

Quote:

I think they are great compliments. Thats why I ordered Thunderpants for when I want closed cans or listen to Led Zepplin. The group buy has started shipping, yay!

I can see that.  I've had this urge to try it again lately.
 
If I ever get one I'll try different variations on the Anax mod though.  Its a little too bright, but the rest of it is pretty awesome.  I wouldn't have a problem spending the money on a used pair if I could get more use out of open headphones.  I'm following this thread to see how the different mods work out in case its useful in the future.